Literature DB >> 3285047

Science, ethics, and the making of clinical decisions. Implications for risk factor intervention.

L Forrow1, S A Wartman, D W Brock.   

Abstract

Recent improvements in the clinical care of individual patients are rooted in advances in two distinct fields of modern medicine: biomedical research and clinical ethics. In this article, we review the differing roles of these two disciplines in guiding decision making for individual patients. Particular attention is placed on decisions involving risk factor intervention, using the common problem of mild hypertension as an illustration. Both the importance and the limitations for decision making of some recently published clinical trials are reviewed. Differences in interpretation of these trials are a source of major disputes about the proper threshold for medical intervention. The ethical aspects of treatment decisions are then reviewed, with particular emphasis on the doctrine of informed consent and on the role of patient participation in treatment decisions. Finally, new directions for clinical research are suggested that may yield a more complete scientific basis for treatment decisions and that may aid in fulfilling the ethical ideals that underlie the physician-patient relationship.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Bioethics and Professional Ethics; Biomedical and Behavioral Research; Professional Patient Relationship

Mesh:

Year:  1988        PMID: 3285047

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  JAMA        ISSN: 0098-7484            Impact factor:   56.272


  16 in total

Review 1.  Teaching medical ethics: a review of the literature from North American medical schools with emphasis on education.

Authors:  D W Musick
Journal:  Med Health Care Philos       Date:  1999

Review 2.  Economic factors in the initiation of antihypertensive therapy.

Authors:  I Kawachi
Journal:  Pharmacoeconomics       Date:  1992-10       Impact factor: 4.981

3.  New elements for informed decision making: a qualitative study of older adults' views.

Authors:  Erika Leemann Price; Sylvia Bereknyei; Alma Kuby; Wendy Levinson; Clarence Henry Braddock
Journal:  Patient Educ Couns       Date:  2011-07-14

4.  Using disease risk estimates to guide risk factor interventions: field test of a patient workbook for self-assessing coronary risk.

Authors:  J Michael Paterson; Hilary A Llewellyn-Thomas; C David Naylor
Journal:  Health Expect       Date:  2002-03       Impact factor: 3.377

5.  Involving patients in complex decisions about their care: an approach using the analytic hierarchy process.

Authors:  J G Dolan; D R Bordley
Journal:  J Gen Intern Med       Date:  1993-04       Impact factor: 5.128

Review 6.  Physicians in health care management: 7. The patient-physician partnership: changing roles and the desire for information.

Authors:  R B Deber
Journal:  CMAJ       Date:  1994-07-15       Impact factor: 8.262

7.  Factors involved in deciding to start preventive treatment: qualitative study of clinicians' and lay people's attitudes.

Authors:  David K Lewis; Jude Robinson; Ewan Wilkinson
Journal:  BMJ       Date:  2003-10-11

8.  The treatment of perinatal addiction. Identification, intervention, and advocacy.

Authors:  M Jessup
Journal:  West J Med       Date:  1990-05

Review 9.  Shared decision-making--transferring research into practice: the Analytic Hierarchy Process (AHP).

Authors:  James G Dolan
Journal:  Patient Educ Couns       Date:  2008-08-28

10.  An evaluation of two decision-making scales for children with life-limiting illnesses.

Authors:  C Knapp; I C Huang; V Madden; S Vadaparampil; G Quinn; E Shenkman
Journal:  Palliat Med       Date:  2009-04-03       Impact factor: 4.762

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.